There are too many ways to do things, that it's not good to remake what is already here, even if it was good there always can be something better - at least that's what I think Anyway...Taehl wrote:We agree, then? Excellent. I was afraid you guys were going to aim for a lame fan remake of an old game, without any considerations towards what fundamental changes could improve it. I'll have to keep an eye on this, then.
yup, too much work - that's why I didn't mentioned itTaehl wrote:True, I hadn't considered that angle. In that case, yes, it could be a decent compromise. However, there are a few more options than you may be aware of:
- Huge world, all made by hand (WoW, Morrowind) (Too much work for an indie team.)
exactly, not fun - again, that's the reason it wasn't hereTaehl wrote:- Small world, all made by hand (most older games) (Players may no be satisfied.)
Taehl wrote: - Small world with different locales, all made by hand (most games nowadays) (The method you suggest. It's a compromise between the first two.)
I must say I don't like such solutions, you don't have much place for good designTaehl wrote: - Huge, procedurally-generated world (Diablo) (These tend to get boring and repetitive.)
I would be quite good solution too, Paul Merrell wrote PhD thesis about model synthesis (interesting read: http://www.cs.unc.edu/~pmerrell/ - procedural generation of 3D models from example artists work, he refers to some 2D solutions too and propose Blender implementation iirc). Cannot be used directly, but some ideas or references who knows. Anyway I would be worried about amount of work needed here. Artists work would be smaller, but coders work would be a LOT more complicated.Taehl wrote: Or...
- Small handmade areas on top of huge procedural world (Subversion (WIP))
I'd highly recommend considering this last method. It combines the best of each option, and modern computers have the power to pull it off. In brief, the developers make some areas by hand (say, a castle), and the game will generate everything else (the forest around the castle). The boundaries don't even need to be so clear-cut: You could put in little handmade details around in the procedural forest, like a meadow or an abandoned farm. This way you can potentially have a huge world for a lot less work than normal. Even better, procedurally-generated content won't increase the size of the game's files, since it's not stored.
We would probably need someone dedicated for this part of project, or small team of say 2 people even. We have few people who volunteered to code, what do you think? Do we have resources to do interesting procedural wilderness from some constrains like geographical data (allowing to determine flora, fauna, terrain type, weather, etc)?
If not, we would have to stick with simpler options.
We will see, let's wait for focus to clear up, this is not important detail right now I thinknapco wrote:I agree also with leaving the most of the calculations to the computer, but we need to keep some, or the player will get lost and won't know how to modify his tactics. (eg: damage visualization, and maybe HP).
I know, it's hard... as I understand we would use it only for wilderness that are travelled trough, most dungeons (at least those connected with quests, otherwise we can end up like Daggerfall with bunch of randomly uncompletable quests) should be premade and all assets and such should be premade. But yes, larger world means more assets to make it more interesting. I don't know. If people here will decide it's possible, we can go for it, or more exactly we will vote for it when time for question about travel view will come. If not, we should stick to smaller world or to showing only interesting parts or larger world.kikito wrote:I'd love to see something like this happening ... but beware! There are difficulties on this approach, too. To a degree, this is what Spelunky does (randomly generated levels that use "bigger pieces" of scenery done by hand, like temples). Some time ago Shamus Young posted how he would have used that same approach for creating Tamriel (the world in Oblivion). Then I found this other guy that I don't know (Mike Rozak) that says it is actually implemented that way (sorry, google cache, the actual page seems to be down)- Small handmade areas on top of huge procedural world
Dwarf Fortress is an example of the "completely random" category, but its worlds are reasonably interesting. The cost is that you need very simple rules, but in great numbers - on that game you can literally "pierce the pancreas of an orc", so somewhere there's a group of rules specifying what happens when an orc's pancreas is pierced. With so many simple, interacting rules, interesting behaviour emerges. But it is long and tiresome to write so many!
Also, procedurally-generated worlds need a nice variety of assets in order to look good - i.e. for people you would need a big set of faces, body parts and clothes. Different kind of houses, trees, animals and floor tiles. A fine example of the sheer difficulty of creating so many assets is Dwarf Fortress itself - they overcame this problem by making it "text-mode-like".
Suggestion for creating the assets: some kind of community effort. Start with a flexible file spec, build a nice editor around it (maybe with a website), and have people contribute and rate others. Otherwise, who is going to draw 50 tsirts in 10 positions, from 4 angles?